Hi Simon, dear other LWG members, Am 29.07.2018 um 08:08 schrieb Simon Poole: > Thanks to work by Kathleen Lu we have a draft Terms of Use document. > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xtPjrTj09vQLloKmzyf-H-5mKtqh-vbPjsxE-5YRF5g/edit?usp=sharing > <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xtPjrTj09vQLloKmzyf-H-5mKtqh-vbPjsxE-5YRF5g/edit?usp=sharing> > > This is a first for OSM given that we've never really spelled out > anything with respect to using the API and website up to now, outside of > the more technical aspects in the acceptable use documents. > > The main motivation for this is driven by the GDPR related changes (not > trying to identify users, restrictions on use by minors and so on), but > there are certain rules that we should have probably been explicit about > all along too. We expect that all access to the website, API and other > services will be contingent on having agreed to the terms. > > Comments are welcome, best per mail or specific comments on the document.
I read the draft and I think that is far too long. It does not invited to be read by the users. This can lead to following issues: - Users don't read it because it is too boring, too long and too difficult to understand (especially for the majority being not native English speakers or understanding no English at all). They would be surprised by the important parts later. - Already active members of the community refuse to accept the terms because they don't understand the needs and the content. If we need all that rules written down there, we should add a summary of the points which are most important from our point of view at the beginning. It could look like this: - You have access to personal data (OSM metadata). Please handle it appropriate. - Your contributions must not violate copyright. - You must be 16 years or older to join OSM. - We don't guarantee anything. [insert better wording here] The OSMF has already a block policy ruling when users get blocked permanently and how. If we add terms to the website, we should integrate the block policy into the terms. This has the advantage that user actively agree the block policy which makes it a lot easier to use it in court (I am not talking about a fictional case here). Best regards Michael -- Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten ausgenommen) I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
